tv Charlie Rose PBS December 18, 2012 5:00am-6:00am EST
>> rose: welcome to the program. a subject tonight is the aftermath to the deadly shooting in connecticut. we begin with mayor michael bloomberg of new york. >> shame on me if i am, as an american, with the wherewithal to do something, i have the bully pulpit, i have some money to spend to support candidates, shame on me if i don't go and do something. how can i explain to my kids that i didn't do something when, you know, i had this able to change the world. >> rose: we continue with john miller, dr. jeffrey lieberman and aborn. >> we have seen in our society a relaxation of cultural norms and constraints, and elevation of individuals of right to express themselves as individuals, freedom of
speech, personal autonomy, self-determination. we've seen an elevation of the rights of the individual to the extent that it's maybe at the expense of the collective society whether it's gun control, right to bear arms or whether it's i can do and say anything and it's my right to do it no matter whom i offend. >> rose: we conclude this evening with mayor julian castro of san antonio and his twin brother joaquin castro, a congressman recently elected from san antonio. >> in the late '70s, maybe it was 78 or '79, time or "newsweek", one of the big magazines back then called the 1980s the decade of the hispanic. and somehow the 80s and 90s went by, it never seemed to be the decade of the hispanics. but november 6th was very significant because it was the first time i believe where hispanics could see that the fact that they showed up and they showed up
in great numbers made a real difference in the policy direction of the country, both in electing-- re-elected president obama and also on this issue of immigration reform. >> rose: the question of where we go from here following the tragedy that took place in connecticut, next. funding for charlie rose was provided by the following:
additional funding provided by these funders: and by bloomberg, a provider of multimedia news and information services worldwide is from our studios captioning sponsored by rose communications from our studios in new york city, this is charlie rose. >> rose: tonight our focus is on what can be done so that the tragedy at sandy
hook elementary school does not happen again. on friday december 14th a gunman killed 26 people, 20 of them were children between the ages of 6 and 7. it is the second deadliest mass shooting in american history. the killings have revived the debate on gun control and demonstrated the need to rethink our approach to mental illness. president obama traveled to the bereaved town to attend a community vigil and console families. here is a part of the president's address to the grieving people of that town, and to the nation. >> no single law, no set of laws can eliminate evil or prevent every senseless act of violence in our society but that can't an excuse for inaction. surely we did:do better than this. if there's even one step we can take to save another child or another parent or another town, from the grief
that's visited tucson, aurora, and oak creek and newtown, and communities from columbine to blacksberg before that, then surely we have an obligation to try. >> rose: joining me now is michael bloomberg. he's the mayor of new york city and he's also the co-chair of mayors against illegal guns. he's long been an outspoken advocate of gun control. he is now call on the nation's lawmakers to make reducing gun violence their top priority. here's what he said earlier today at a city hall press conference. >> if the massacre in tucson wasn't enough to make our national leaders act, and if the more recent bloodshed in aurora, colorado, and oak creaks wisconsin, and portland oregon and other cities and towns wasn't enough, perhaps the slaughter of innocence at sandy hook elementary school will at long last be enough. millions of americans hope that is true. but it's not enough for us
to hope. we have to speak up. we have made our voices heard and hold washington accountable for facing up to the epidemic of gun violence in our country. if this moment passes in to memory without action from washington, it will be a stain upon our nation's commitment to protecting the innocence innocent including our children. >> rose: i'm pleased to have mayor bloomberg back at this table. >> thank you for having me. >> rose: on "meet the press" yesterday, at a press conference today you believe that the time is now, that this is the moment to act, and at the same time you are chastising the president for-- i believe the time was a long time ago, the president gave a speech after the massacre in a-- aurora, colorado, saying we have to do something. here we are two years later, another 21,000 people in america killed with guns. we've done nothing. i mean, you know, i don't know at what point you have to say enough is enough.
we've been killing 34 americans every single day. that's bigger than virginia tech. every single day. and you done cover it because it's 34 separate occurrences around the country. and it doesn't grab the public's imagination, psyche, sympathy, there's just-- you don't get a visceral reaction when it's people you don't know and can't see. >> rose: have we got that now, the visceral reaction that this is somehow different because it children. >> i sure hope so i was asked today is it different with children. it is in the public psyche. but i think if you talk to the families of teenagers and even adults who were killed before the sympathyes with their loss is exactly the same as the parents of young people. but young people that people look and say oh my god what are we really doing here. >> rose: what is your criticism of the president of the united states? >> well, i don't know that criticism is the right word. i believe that his job is to lead.
when you tell me that congress won't pass a bill that the country desperately needs, that may be. but it's the president's job to go and to introduce the bill and to fight for it, even if he doesn't get it done. in our culture we've been in politics we've decided to call oh, he's a loser because i didn't get it done. i would call him a hero for trying to get things done that we need. and if congress doesn't go along at least the public then knows where to focus their efforts to change the world. >> rose: do you believe that is politically doable? >> oh, yes, absolutely. there's this myth that the nra is this organization that decides who wins and who loses. first what's the difference if you lose. how you can look in a mirror and say to get my campaign going or to win an election i was willing to let more kids get killed. i mean somehow or another we have this all mixed up here. we keep talking about is it
good or bad for campaigns, is it good or bad politics. i come from a world where if i said that to the press i would just get massacred, what's right. and we have an obligation to help these kids stay alive. and adults as well. and the nra, their number one, to show you how powerless they really are, their number one objection -- objective in this last election was to defeat barack obama for a secretary term. last time i checked, he won. and he won reasonably comfortably. i went in, we created a small pact. we put some money in-- a small pac. we put some money into some campaigns for congress, i think five campaigns where the nra supported the other side. we won four of them. and the nra has created this myth that you can't fight them. >> rose: so one objective is to destroy the myth of the nra. >> well, yes, and to explain to the public, if you really want to change, you have to call your senator or your congressman or your governor
or your mayor or your president and say this is important to me. i want my kids to be safe. i want to be safe. and if you don't do what is necessary i am going to give money to your opponent the next time. i'm going to work for your opponent in their campaign. i'm going to vote for your opponent. because what it looks like is the only thing anybody cares about is getting re-elected. and so pli the game, if that's what they want, okay. we're going to get your opponent elected unless you stand up and do was's right for us. >> rose: each day 34 americans are murdered by guns. >> yes. >> rose: this is what you call for. congress passing the fix gun checks act. >> yup. >> rose: which would close a loophole. >> well, 40% of the guns-- let me step back. congress voted some laws to be tough. congress always does this. they're so tough, for those that were sorry about a massacre, they voted no guns in the hands of criminals or drug addicts or psychiatric problems, people with psychiatric problems or
minorities. and then, of course, they don't fund it they don't fund the enforcement so they can say to both sidesness don't worry about t i'm with you babes, but both sides. 40% of the guns that are sold in this country are sold either over the internet or at gun shows and the federal law-- the federal laws don't cover that, so you have to change that law. that is one thing that congress should do. and that's this gun check act. second, they've got to pass a ban on assault weapons. you know, the founding fathers never thought about assault weapons. they were talking about a militia, the founding fathers never thought-- i will give you a good example. they, you can go into a gun magazine and see advertisements for armour piercing bullets. now i don't know if you are a hunter but when is the last time you saw a deer wearing a bulletproof vest. not very frequently. as a matter of fact, nobody wears bulletproof vests except one group, police. and so these bullets are designed to kill cops.
it's the only rational to go and buy an armour-piercing bullet. i've never understood why the police in this country don't get together and say enough. i don't want to die. i want to go home to my family. an we've got to do something, you the public to protect me. so you have to dot effective ban and assault weapons and then you've got to page gun traffic -- >> those are three legislative things. >> what got you so involved, you have been out front more than anybody else. any other public official. what got you there. >> i've gone to a dozen or 15, something like that, police officers, funerals. and i look at the families. and my job was in some sense i was the failure. because my responsibility is to make sure all of our employees get home safe every night. and here were a dozen or so cops who did not come home. their families don't have them any more for support, for love, for friendship, to raise, to enjoy. and so why shouldn't i do this.
somebody this morning asked me well, you know, it's new york, why dow care about the rest of the country. number one guns travel overboarders easily. most of the guns that we seize, the illegal guns we seize in new york city come from other states. there are very few sold in new york from manufacturers in new york. new york city actually, new york state has a very stringent gun laurx three and a half mandatory years in jail if you carry an illegal loaded gun. we have in new york city very aggressive policing. we have worked very hard with kids to explain to them they just can't have guns but if they do carry guns and we catch them there will be real penalties. we've done things in new york city to make sure-- we have closed the gun show look loophole in new york city. but we can't do it for the whole country. >> david brooks, as you know, suggested that you are the wrong person to be out front on this issue because, he said t is an urban rule issue. and for you to be out front. >> what's wrong with me being an urban rule. i live urban guy, i grew up
in a causei rural area what did i miss here? you know, i-- i read david brooks all the time. i think he's brilliant but i don't know where he came up with that. shame on me if i'm, as an american with the wherewithal to do something. i have the bully pulpit, i have some money to spend to support candidates. shame on me if i don't go and do something. how can i explain to my kids that i didn't do something when i, you know, i had the ability to change the world. >> rose: there are those who also argue prohibition, this is jim fowlers as you know, prohibition didn't work with alcohol, it isn't working with drugs and with to the work as guns. main hope of minimizing damage lies in a practical measure to increase gun safety. >> you know, there's always-- we're going to, in cities that they've hired counselors to go out and work with gangs. one mayor said don't do your stuff on the streets, gangs, do it in the back alleys.
i mean those cities, the crime rate is through the roof. ours is down 20% this year, our murder rate. these are kids who understand one thing. enforcement of the laws. and yes, we have to improve education. yes, we have to improve the family structure. yes, we have to research psychiatric problems and you have a guy come on dr. lieberman, i'm sure will talk about all that. but nevertheless, that's not at the level where you fight guns short term. we can't wait for improvements in our school system. we've been waiting 50 year force that. kuwait another 50 years? you know how many people are going to get killed during obama's next four years in office, 48,000 americans will be killed, to put-- with guns. to put that in perspective, that's more americans than died in vietnam since march tin luther king and jfk-- rfk were assassinated back in 68y there has been over 400,000 americans shot with guns, killed. that's more than the number
of americans that died in world war ii. and we don't pay any attention to this. this is just crazy. >> rose: some people argue and jeffrey goldberg and others have said, even members of congress, that might allowing more law-abiding private citizens carrying concealed weapons with other stringent gun regulation actually reduce gun violence. >> there is absolutely no evidence. as a matter of fact, the statistic i like is if you have a gun at home, you are 22 times as likely to kill a family member or a friend as to somebody that was trying to burgal you. >> 22 times more likely. >> it is just not true. they say oh, people should carry guns on campus. you went to college, much to my amazement and didn't go to john hopkins, but that is okay. >> probably couldn't get there. >> i couldn't get into your school either. do you remember what you were like then. should you have had a gun in your pocket. >> of course not. >> of course not. i moan this just-- you know.
you can say oh, there's no evidence. but there is. if you tell a lie often enough, people start to believe it. and the people without want to believe everything anyways. the truth of the matter is guns are dangerous things, particularly assault weapons with-- and pistols and a saument weapon with its high capacity magazines. the only reason you would have one of those is to kill lots of people. you don't go after a deer with a glock that has 20 odd bullets in it and go-- that is not, i mean if that is what you do you are not exactly a sportsman. >> rose: this is an opportunity where you can do something. how far are you prepared to go? >> well, i've said that i'm going to try to make a difference. this time we did support five congressman or i think four congressman and a senator. >> rose: from your pac. >> yeah. anyways, five people running for office. the nra backed, we beat them on four. next time i certainly will do more. i think.
>> rose: members of congress without wouldn't support an assault weapon ban, are you prepared to do whatever resources you have. >> it depends. look, you don't pick a candidate to vote for based on any one issue, you will never find everybody that agrees with you on everything. so it's always a kprichlts i endorsed barack obama, as you know in the end. and i was reasonably critical of him in my endorsement. but i said in the endorsement he has the right instincts on guns and on choice and on gay rights and on immigration and on science and things that i care about, the environment. but now i expect him to deliver. and i'm not going to walk away from, politely. he's the president of the united states. i'm sympathetic, he can't do everything he wants. but his job is to lead. he is supposed to be the could pander in chief, not the consoler in chief. he talked about immediate action. we need it, even if he doesn't win if getting it through congress, at least he should stand up and say
this is what i believe, this is the law that should be passed. i am going to send it to congress, and if they don't vote it isn't that i am not going to have tried at least. but to be afraid of sending anything because he's to the going to win, that's ridiculous. >> rose: do you think that's the reason he hasn't followed up on his instincts? >> you got to ask him. you know, i don't know. i'm disappointed that he has not. i was disa pointed in mitt romney. mitt romney when he was governor of massachusetts had passed and signed an assault weapon ban. and then when he ran for the republican nomination totally went in the other direction and never went back during the general election. and i said in pie endorsement, i would have seriously considered mitt romney if he had just kept the values that he had when he was governor rdz if you talked to the president since this awful thing happened in connecticut. >> no, no, i have not. i've gotten calls from a number of mayors. we've gotten a number, a dozen more mayors that called up today to join the mayor's coalition against
illegal guns from cities where it was tough to get them, we con before. i've talked to some senators, some very conservative, very liberal ones on other issues. i was actually talking to them today on hurricane relief money. and the subject obviously came up and you know, it's interesting, everybody's got a different view but i think only the really hard-core people would say we should continue to let people easily get an assault weapon. this just can't go on. 34 a day, more and more, as a matter of fact, i think it was two days ago there was another multiple murder in chicago or some other place. it just, we've got to stop it. an will the next one be more or less grab the public's fancy attention as much, i don't know. but i will say today the 34 people who we will stand
behind me at my press conference, 34 represented that die every day, every one of these had lost or had somebody slot in their family. and i walked around the room shaking the hands, introducing myself. a lot hi met before because they had been here. and looking them in the eye and the way they look at you and say please, just get this done. they condition bring back their kid but they just want to have some closure to say at least something good came out of it. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> mayor michael bloomberg, mayor of new york city. back in a moment. stay with us. we continue our coverage of the shooting at sandy hook elementary school with john miller. he is a former fbi official and also my colleague at cbs news. also joining us dr. jeffrey lieberman, chairman of psychiatry at columbia university and director of the new york state psychiatric institute and richard aborn of the citizen's crime collision of new york city. i'm pleased to have all of them here.
i begin with john miller. so what more do we know this evening about the killer, about his mother, about his motive. >> what we know about the kill certificate that he apparently had planned to do much more an much worse than he actually accomplished, which is hard to fathom. but what we are told now by police are that not only did he have multiple weapons which we knew and not only did they recover multiple shell cases from the shots he fired, but he also possessed, and i'm quoting now, hundreds of rounds of unspent ammunition that he brought with him, possibly with the intent to go through. so this is a school that had 600 students. and apparently he came armed with enough weaponry and ammunition to try and go through that school and keep going had the police not encountered him so quickly. and i think that's startling. >> rose: incredible. do we also believe at this
time or do the people you talk to believe that he had a plan to kill himself if, in fact, he was likely to be apprehended? >> hard to say because we don't know what was in his head except the indicators are, the police officer said i saw him. and i know he saw me. and then he ducked into a doorway. the next thing i heard were several shots. now that's more shots than buy need to take your own life with a head shot. so it appears that he finished off the rest of the magazine in his rifle at innocent children and other victims, discarded that weapon and then used the handgun to shoot himself in the head. it indicates a, the pathology, if you will, from a profiler's standpoint. and i've talked to a few of them about this, of a suspect who felt out of control in his life who wanted control in this incident. he controlled how he killed his mother at home by shooting her in the bed while she slept. he controlled the victims he chose. he controlled how he got into that school by shooting
out the window and stepping through the glass, killing the adults who attempted to interfere and going against the post defenseless victims. so when confronted by an equal force, trained, armed police, he decided he would not cede that control. this is again, analysis, rather than fact. would not cede that control as to how he was going to dichlt he stepped out of their view and took his own life. >> rose: they're still looking at who he might have talked to. they are still looking at the hard drive in his computer. they're still looking at who he might have communicated anything. >> that's true. and the hard drives were very badly damaged. he took heavy objects and dropped things on them, smashing them. and frankly, even with the most talented computer labs between the connecticut state authorities and the fbi in new haven and even in washington, there is some doubt as to whether they will be able to get information out of that or much information given how badly damaged it is. >> rose: tell me about
mental health and profiles. and what we know about people who do this kind of thing. >> well, charlie, sadly mental health does figure into these wanton and horrific crimes that do occur. because of the fact that certain types of mental illness if untreated do raise the risk of people acting in a way which seems irrational and perpetrates harm and possibly lots of life on other people. the usual context in which this occurs is when an individual has a psychotic disorder such as schizophrenia, such as a mood disorder with psychotic features. and they're impelled by their symptoms, principlesfully the delusions. they think false beliefs and have to act at the behest of these or they're hearing voices which are commanding them to do things. this is an example of what happened with jared loughner in arizona with gabbie giffords, congressman giffords and is likely the
motivating factors with the student at virginia tech. the other way in which mental illness can figure into leading an individual to this kind of irrational violence is by a loss of the ability to control emotions. that is the emotions they feel which we all feel in our context of our lives but are able to exert control, they're not able to. and so this exceeds their thresholds for the capacity for control and impels them to do these things. and although with treatment these shouldn't lead to these consequences, the way health care is delivered in this country, we do not provide adequate mental health-care services to all the people who are in need leaving this risk to, unfortunately, sometimes come to fruition. >> tell me what ought to be done about guns. >> so in every single circumstances like this we not only see a gun but we very often see an assault
weapon and almost every time we see these large capacity magazine, and the reason we see that is the assault weapons are incredibly efficient and large magazines carry numerous rounds. so the first thing we have to do is just turn down the firepower. and we can do that very quickly. in 1994 we had banned the weapons that were used in this case and in many other shootings. and we had banned the large capacity magazines. in 2004 the congress put those guns and those magazines back on the streets. it's now time to take them off. but that's not the cure-all it that will help a lot. but that will begin to lower the temperature. but then we need to go further. we need to make sure that before anyone can purchase a gun in this country they have to go through a background check. right now 40% of all the sales of guns, legal sales of guns in this country are not required to go through a background check. so people say to me all the time, well, you passed the brady bill. doesn't that require background check for all guns. >> it doesn't, it done. >> rose: what is the exception. >> the exception is if you are a private seller,
selling to a private individual, you do to the have to go through the federally mandated background check and that's a big loophole and you most often see it at gun shows which happen every weekend around this country. third we need to be much more stren youous about making sure that those that have any sort of mental illness don't have access to firearms. and that occurs in two ways. we need to make sure that the background check system can check relevant mental health records and do that automatically. but there is another piece of this. we should also resist this temptation to say that the law can do everything, that we can regulate our way out of this problem. the other reality of this is if you make the decision to get a gun, with that decision comes a very significant responsibility. you have that responsibility. and that responsibility is twofold. one, you need to make sure that kids can't find that gun. that you keep that gun locked up and away from those that shouldn't use them. and secondly, frankly, if you have a child in your house, a child, a 20-year-old who has these
sorts of issues, get the guns out of your home. the guns are not that important. get the guns out of your home. so it's a combination of legislative reform and individual responsibility, all of which has to rest on a base of a big dialogue between gun owners and nongun owners. >> rose: what would happen in cases like this, and all the other cases if somebody couldn't put their hands on a gun? >> well, not to be crass about this, but the same day in china there was a man that went wild in a school. he stabbed 22 kids, four were injured, none died. you don't need to know anything more than that. you have never heard of a drive-by stabbing. you've never horde of a mass killing with knives or fists. it doesn't happen. we need to take the lethality out of this. we need to change the gun culture in this country so that those who go through the right background checks, those that get a licence, those that get safety training can get a gun. but understand the responsibility attendant to that. and then crack down on these
illegal markets. >> rose: do you believe we're at a moment that this has been one of those times in which history of guns will be changed? >> yes, we are at the same moment now that we were at in '94. in '94 we had a national crisis of violence in this country, kroims with going through the roof. people cried out for something. it's the exact same feeling now. we have kindergartens and first graders being killed. what more do we need to know than that. but, charlie, the key here is not to feel outraged today and tomorrow and next week. the key is to feel outraged when congress comes back into session and maintain the pressure. because that's what we did in '94. and that's how we beat the nra. >> rose: john, anything her here-- what, what is the most difficult thing to overcome in order to have a strong position on guns become actionable. >> the politics. this is not about policy. we know what to do. that's the crime here. it's about the politics. and the politics break down for the following reason.
the nra has falsely but successfully argued to their membership that we want to take away every single gun in america. we want a ban on guns, why do they do that? because they understand that if you want to maintain a national social movement you have to give your members something to gain or something to lose. we have to have that this corresponding intensity on our side. >> is there generally an event that precipitates someone doing what happened in general general? >> well, i mean frequently it's a single event where there is, i mean, the passion, the crime of passion where somebody is fired from their job and they avenge this, but in the case of-- connecticut, but what happens with individuals who are at risk by virtue of mental illness is that some incident which can be entirely random or some series of slights insults, prove vacation, altercations which come together coincidentally puts them over the edge and
produces it. and here's where richard's point is relevant. is if at that point there is a firearm or worse yet an assault weapon that is readilily available then it translates into this heinous type of action. >> i think if you talk to the roy hazelton or jim clemente or helen o'tooles the former fbi profilers who built the data on these things you see a couple of things. as dr. lieberman said these are injustice checkers. they kind of stack all the wrongs that are done to them in life and they think about how am i going to get even. either with those people directly or with some other group of people just to show that i have power. i'm not powerless. these things get a lot of med why attention, charlie. nobody understands that better than us. and there is what they call a worther effect. which is one person who is already disturbed, and already thinking about doing something terrible sees one of these on the news and says i like what that person did. or i want to take that
aspect of it and add it into my plan. or i want to now accelerate my plan because this inspired me. and that's why you see one of these, perhaps, in portland on a tuesday, and we saw the next one on the friday of the same week in a school from a food court to a school. in both cases, victims who you would have a real problem arguing had anything to do with either one of these gunman's problems. >> i think over the course of the last several decades we've seen in our society a relaxation of cultural norms and constraints and an elevation of individuals of right to express themselves as individuals, freedom of speech, personal autonomy, self-determination. we've seen an elevation of the rights of the individual to the extent that it's maybe at the expense of the collective society, whether it's gun control, right to bear arms or whether it's i can do and say anything and
it's my right to do it no matter whom i offend rdz thank you, thank you, thank you very much, gentlemen. back in a moment. stay with us. we conclude this evening with joaquin and julian castro, this november joaquin was elected to congress. julian is the mayor of san antonio. both entered the national spotlight when jowlian was introduced as keynote speaker at the democratic national convention. his speech told the extraordinary story of the grandmother who immigrated from mexico as an orphan. >> my family story isn't special. what's special is the america that makes our story possible. ours is a nation like no other, a place where great journeys can be made in a single generation, no matter who you are or where you come from, the path is always forward. >> rose: i am pleased to have them here at this table. welcome. >> thank you. >> great to be here. >> great to be with you. >> let's just talk about your mother first. >> sure.
>> rose: i mentioned her, political activist. >> right. >> she wanted you to do what? >> she wanted us to do whatever we wanted to do. and it so ended up that we did a lot of what she was doing with her life, you know, we grew up in a family that was very political, not just in terms of being in electoral politics. my mom ran for city council when she was 23 years old before there were single member districts in san anton yom. but also i think going to different civic events. we grew a real civic conscience, i like to say, and an appreciation for how government can help people in their lives when it works right, when it's not heavy-handed, but when it works right. >> rose: the remarkable thing su both went to standford, to harvard law school. >> can't get rid of us. >> rose: is that right? but what is that? you are twins, clearly have the same profession, same educational background, same mother. how close are you?
>> we're very close. >> and generally in my life i found that twins do one of two things. either they're very close and stay that way or they try as hard as they can to distinguish themselves from one another. and we're the former. we're just, we remain very, very close, as youd, went to college and law school together. we are both attorneys. we're both in politics. although i have to say that i see what cone less now than i have ever in my life because he's up shuttling back and forth between washington an san an tonio and i have a family now. the biggest way to distinguish is i wear the wedding ring. >> that is how you can tell right now. i don't know what people are going to do when you get married. that is exactly the way they had said to me. the thing you can be sure of the one who is wearing the wedding ring is the mayor. >> and he goes around telling everybody that i'm the ugly one so telling people i'm a minute better looking. >> he's a minute older. >> you were born first.
>> a minute older, yeah. >> rose: let me talk about a serious subject, what happened in connecticut. and whether you guys look at that and do you feel the resonance of a sense that there's something has to be done as the president so eloquently said last night. >> i do. i think americans feel that. and president obama's speech in connecticut resonated, i would say, with the vast majority of americans. he also had it right that it's a complex issue. but there is a feeling that you know, the second amendment is there in the constitution, folks will have the right to bear arms, at the same time like every other, every other freedom there are reasonable limits, regulations to be placed on it. i believe that senator feinstein las it right with regard to the assault weapons ban. that it ought to be reintroduced. >> rose: but you're saying the first step is to renew the assault weapon ban.
>> i think renewing the assault weapons ban, closing the gun show loophole is very reasonable. and these are things that as folks have said, even nra members agree with. >> i think it's time to take a different route. >> also, in addition to the school shootings over the years and of course this very tragic event that we have just gone through as a nation, you also have everything that has happened with the stand your ground laws which also have gone too far. >> we saw them in florida. >> right, right so when you take all of those things together, i think it is imperative that the next congress act on this issue. it is a very, it has become a kind of third rail issue in american politics. and it shouldn't be. you know -- >> so arming teachers is not the answer. >> what parent is going to want a lot of teachers around in the classroom with their five, six, seven-year-old children in the classroom. you know, i think that's very different from the argument that we have heard from the other side which is well, look, if somebody walk those a movie theatre, they
walk into an office place somewhere else and they've got a gun, then the best answer, best response to that is for other people to be armed also. >> it also does have to be said that there is the issue of mental illness, and better being able to identify when an individual has an issue that is serious, that is leading or could lead to violence. >> and i think also, charlie, i think doing it in a way that shows that elected officials respect a second amendment, that people have a right to protect themselves, that you're to the going to go and take everybody's guns away. >> and go hunting, we're from texas so you can imagine. you know, there are responsibility gun owners and the used guns responsibly. they're separate and apart from the issue that we have here. >> an in just one kind of vignette from my own life, a few years ago i was driving from san antonio to martha texas, probably about a six and a half hour drive through the country in texas. and as we were coming into sunset, and off into the distance on ih-10, on
interstate 10 i saw a house way off in the distance, no other houses around. nobody else around. i thought at that time if you don't have a gun in that house to protect yourself, you know, you've got to be crazy. because if you call the police they're to the going to get there for 30, 40 minutes. you have to be able to protect yourself if something happens. >> rose: so that person should have the right to have a gun. >> well, absolutely. >> rose: of some kind. >> sure, sure, sure. and there's plenty of situations where, people need to be able to protect themselves. >> rose: have you gotten nra support in your elections? >> it's been a nonissue. as a mayor there in san antonio it really hasn't been an issue. of course texas generally is supportive of guns. and what cone and i are supportive of folks being able to have guns am but i do think we can be more nuanced about what types of guns and also things like making sure that we close that loophole on gun shows. >> just like you have restrictions on free speech
there are restrictions on each of these rights that we have. but the debate has been so skewed towards a bit of paranoia over the last several years, it's been tough to have a honest debate about it. >> do you want to be president. >> i will leave that to him. >> rose: i was going to figure out how you were going to set they will. >> i'm the younger brother so-- . >> rose: by a second. >> a minute, yeah. >> rose: there is this. you gave a electrifying speech at the convention. the previous person to give an lech try-- electrifying speech became president. there is also this, the rising influence of the hispanic community. tell me about how you see that in the demographics of hispanics coming to be respected as a powerful force in american politics, and members of the hispanic community getting enormous attention whether it's senator cruz or senator rubbio or others.
>> in the late 70s. >> on both sides. >> sure, in the late 70s maybe it was 78y or 79y time or "newsweek" one of the big magazines back then called the 1980s the decade of the hispanic. >> yeah. >> and somehow the 80s went by and the 90s went by and 29,000 went by. >> there never seemed to be the decade of the hispanics but november 6th was very significant because it was the first time i believe where hispanics could see that the fact that they showed up and they showed up in great numbers made a real difference toward, in the policy direction of the country both in electing, re-elected president obama and also on this issue of immigration reform. that the next day literally you could see republicans change their tune p go there a different direction in terms of that issue. so as we go into -- >> on immigration. >> on immigration. as we think about 2014 and beyond, there's no question that the power of the latino
vote is getting stronger and stronger. >> it is partly about policy, and you suggest immigration reform and some other issues but i also wonder how much of it is also about pride and dignity and a sense of recognition that you have influence in the american body politics. >> i said before that not only in rhetoric but also in policy, a lot of what republicans have pursued has made latinos in the united states feel as though they aren't part of america. and now these are folks who maybe recent imgrants but they're also first and second and third and fourth and fifth generation americans. and they are fundamentally part of the american family. and they believe that, and they want the rest of society to believe that. >> rose: and you say they. yet but as i said, in texas the senator is a republican. >> absolutely. >> rose: and a tea party republican. >> there's no question. senator cruz. >> rose: and a rodes scholar, a bright guy.
>> very bright guyment i would say the same thing about senator rubbio and martinez and governor sandoval. what the election results show is that the hispanics or latinos are like any community. they care about different issues. a lot of the same issues, jobs, about health care, about education. and about immigration reform. and they're analyzing policy, not just tone and not just who the people are, the personalities. so as republicans fret and as they think about well, were are we going to do to get a larger percentage of the fastest growing voting community, they need to think about not just what personalities they have or the tone that they use, they need to think about why they don't support expanding health care, because 9 million more latinos are going have health care because of the affordable care act. >> are democrats in congress going have any problem with the president if in order to raise rates on the wealthy he makes a deal with john boehner to cut entitlements? >> well, you know, you see a lot of fretting about that, and these are tough issues. and that's why there has
been a lot of wrangling am but i believe that most americans, both at least democrats and now a growing majority of republicans do want both sides to come to the table to raise taxes, but also to deal with the entitlement situation. >> rose: you're saying that members of the republicans in congress-- i mean democrats in congress are prepared, they understand as they did. >> i believe so. >> rose: as they did in 2000, the last time that the president-- had to negotiate the debt ceiling. >> absolutely. and in 2010 before that, during that time, democrats came to the table with a serious proposal in earnest which was rebuffed by republicans. and democrat its still remain committed to finding a bipartisan solution to this. >> what would be the best and the most realistic immigration policy? what ought we do about people who are already in the country. >> comprehensive immigration reform that's affect sieve going to have several parts. first it's going to continue to make sure that the
borders are secure, it's going to enhance that. secondly work with employers to establish an even better system so that they can know when they hire someone that they're hiring someone who's here legally. and then third it's going to set up some way to deal with the 11 to 12 million folks who are here, undocumented, illegal, whatever you want to call them. >> what's the most -- >> i think first that they come out of the shadows, that they identify themselves. >> right. >> that you penalize them with a fine. that you -- >> that's okay. >> yeah, also that they learn english. that they get to the back of the line. but that they are fundamentally put and if they don't have a serious criminal record as well, the ones that do, of course, they're going to get deported. but finally that you put them on a path to citizenship. and this is where the fault line as you know is going to be. there are a whole bunch of republicans that sort of faint in the direction of comprehensive immigration
reform. but they want to put these folks into some sort of legallization limb above. never actually allow them to be citizens. and there's a suspicion that that is because they are afraid of the electoral impact of that down the road. i think if are you going do it you need to put these folks on the patto citizenship after they have been penalized and completed these requirements. >> some republicans call that amnesty. you know t that has been used kind of pejoratively. but the fact is there are four or five or more major american industries. that literally would not exist the way they do without undualed labor. an as a nation we have wrestled with that reality for a long time. but i think this election gave us the momentum to finally i think deal with it in an earn les way, in a comprehensive way. and i think we'll see it happen over the next two years. >> what other issues are porn to the hispanic community? >> oh, i think the issues -- >> all those things -- >> sure, i think the issues
that concern all americans. education, you know, people want to see as they're coming up in the united states that there is a path to success for themselves and for their kids. health care because as julian said you have millions and millions of latino, the largest community that is uninsured. so all of the bread-and-butter issues that the american family cares about are also issues that the latino community cares about. >> rose: as bad as it height seem people are already talking about 201416. >> everyone just got down with 2012. >> and the name everybody talks about is hillary clinton. >> sure. >> rose: would she get strong support in texas if she ran? >> oh, absolutely, sure. she would get very strong support in texas. she and president clinton in 1927 went down there to campaign for george mcgovern. >> rose: the late george mc2k3w06 earn. >> still very much remembered. so i am confident she would get support. i think within the next six to eight years that texas is going to be a compet competitive state, perhaps a purple state it is going to
take some time. >> rose: what is going to change that. >> there are three things making it more competitive. first the demographic changes in the last ten years, latinos accounted for 65% of the growth, and their electoral impact is growing. secondly because texas has done well during this downturn you have dones-- tons of people moving in from california, nevada, florida, colorado, other places that are having a moderating influence on the state. and then the third is that the republicans have just gone off the rails. and they're losing the business community little by little so they are -- >> why are they losing the business community? >> because it has become more about ideology than pragmatism and making the investments that you need to make to compete in the 21st century global economy. not investing in roads and infrastructure the way they should. >> water, not investing in education, just these basic investments that you need to make that have a high return on investment when you're talking about-- . >> rose: an would you argue that you can make those
investments and at the same time deal with the definite sithe and at the same time generate growth in the economy? >> oh i believe so. having served if the legislature now for five terms i believe we could have done a much better job on all of those fronts. but you've got if governor perry, certainly in senator cruz now folk whose idea logically are very much to the far right. and there a strong community in the middle in texas who isic wag up and realizing, you though,-- know this is not what is best for our future. i think as that realization comes to full bloom you'll see democrats become more competitive. >> rose: i want to talk about the two of you as human beings in the moment beyond this wonderful educational background you have had and your mother and her influence. do you have about the same iq? >> i don't know. >> i would like to think i'm just a little bit smarter. >> i think so. >> rose: how are you not alike? >> i am a little bit quieter than joaquin is, neither one of us is the life of the party. we're not loud. but i'm a little bit quieter.
>> a little bit more extroverted. >> rose: are you more extroverted. >> yeah, and growing up he did better in sports and i did better in grades am we were very competitive growing up. >> rose: in everything. >> pretty much, in sports, in school. >> rose: did you run for like school president and those kinds of things. >> no, in fact, we ran the first office we ran for was student senate at standford in our junior year and we actually tied for first place with the exact same number of votes with. >> 811 vote there were 43 candidates. i think the computer just made a mistake and thought we were the same person. >> rose: but i mean dow like different color, do you like different sport, dow like different things. >> different foods within i tend to watch pore basket 3w5u8. i will eat certain types of food like indian food. >> we read different things. i read a lot of nonfiction essays. i see him, i go to his house and he's got, you know, "the new york times" and "the washington post" and all of these policy magazines open. so our tastes are a little bit different there. >> rose: and how does it come home in surprising ways that you are twins other
than the way you look? >> you know, it's interesting. we're often over its years have been kind of on the same wavelength. >> rose: that's what i mean. >> yeah. and sow i remember being at standford and there were many times where i would call my mom and i would be on the phone with her for a minute an she would say orbltion, your brother is calling me, at the same time of the day. or, or i would call her and she would say oh i'm talking to your brother right now. so there is something there. >> rose: yeah,. >> it's fascinating because as twins, in sort of the nature and nurture debate f you grow up together, you get both of those things simultaneously. the same genes. and because you look the same you are being reared by the same parents, you're moving through the world just physically and psychologically almost eye dentically. and so you have both of these things on high gear in the same direction. >> an people relating to you in the same way. >> when we showed up to college, i remember both of us used to say our mom, our
dad, so i would be talking to a stranger and i would say you know, our mom is coming to visit us. and it's kind of weird because we don't share a mom but i meant my brother and me, so-- getting out of that collective term was strange for us. >> you get used to thinking in terms of we instead of i. >> rose: but are you best friends in the end. >> oh, sure, absolutely. in fact, one of the "bull session," being a twin its with a blessing and a curse it was a blessing that you have a best friend your whole life. somebody you grow up with when you you are young, play with and so forth. it's a curse because i had someone in joaquin that was so much like me in such a great friend that i never felt compelled to go out and make a ton of friends. that's terrible for politics. i joke that in high school i used to talk to three people during the day and one of them was my brother. >> rose: i notice you have a red tie and he has a blue tie. >> we try to keep it separate. >> i'm the republican today. >> rose: you said that i think you may have said this,
that in ten years san, the country will look like san antonio. >> yeah. >> or texas would look like san antonio. >> that's right. i think of san antonio, we say that it is the new face of the american dream. it's about 60% hispanic, in texas right now hispanic community is 38% of the state and growing very quickly. so it's a look at the texas of tomorrow and the america of the second half 2691s century. that's great for those of white house are working in san antonio because to the extent that we can address policy issues in a successful way, it bodes very well for the rest of the state and the rest of the nation in the years to come. >> rose: thank you for coming. a pleasure to you have here. >> thank you,. >> great to be here. >> rose: thank you for joining us. see you next time.